A month after TCW sued him, Jeff Gundlach on Wednesday filed a cross-complaint against his ex-employer, claiming up to $1.25 billion on grounds of breach of contract and related misconduct stemming from Gundlach's December ouster from the Los Angeles bond shop.

To read the rest of the story of the fight between Gundlach and TCW, click here.

"I believe the facts stack up overwhelmingly on our side," said Gundlach, TCW's ex-chief investment officer and now CEO of DoubleLine LLC, in a news release on Wednesday. "I would be delighted to see this case go to trial tomorrow, if that were feasible."

"We will address Mr. Gundlach's counterclaims in the appropriate venue, which is the court," wrote TCW spokesperson Erin Freeman in an e-mailed statement to The MFWire. "We have no intention of deflecting attention away from the serious misconduct and breach of fiduciary duties of which he and his co-defendants are accused."

Gundlach's cross-complaint marks the latest episode in the soap opera that has riveted the mutual fund industry since late last year.

On December 4, TCW announced that it was acquiring Metropolitan West Asset Management and firing Gundlach amid a power struggle.

TCW filed a 39-page complaint against Gundlach and three others on January 7, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, breach of confidence, threatened and actual misappropriation of trade secrets, intentional interference with contractual relations, intentional interference with with prospective economic advantage, and civil conspiracy.

In his cross-complaint, Gundlach alleged that TCW
"hatched a scheme to deprive Gundlach and his group of this lucrative compensation package and to confiscate the huge future fees that would be generated as the result of the skill and hard work of Gundlach and his group."

TCW, according to the cross-complaint, agreed with Gundlach to "share with him and his team a predetermined percentage of the management fees and performance fees generated on the TCW funds his group managed. As time went on, these funds performed so well that the anticipated future fees that would be owed under this agreement became enormous, reaching at least $600 million and easily approaching $1.25 billion and beyond."
&nbsp